What's new
By:

2022 Jazzfanz all time nba draft sign up

NUMBERICA said:
We need @Saint Cy of JFC and then a mandatory showdown between him and @LoPo
Click to expand...
Zero chance I win that showdown.

He will produce some obscure stat to try to elevate his team like per 36 wearing a white jersey on away games John Havlicek has an outstanding Raptor rating when playing with a shooting guard with a such and such wingspan.

I'll be like "PC load letter, what the **** does that mean?"

Sent from my SM-A516U using JazzFanz mobile app
 
NUMBERICA said:
Nah. About half the teams will be dead on arrival since there are so few ancients that make sense in the later/modern eras.
Click to expand...
Translation: voters are ****ing clueless and cannot imagine well enough to extrapolate how a player like Kareem would still be dominant in today's NBA by a mile, especially with modern medicine, training, and coaching, all just because he played in the "olden days". Main reason I won't play. It is insanely stupid to say that a player like Oscar Robertson or Bill Russell or Walton or Dr. J would not be simply dominant if their career had the same trajectory, with modern coaching training and medicine, as a Durant or Irving or Giannis or basically anyone except LeBron in the modern age. Pistol Pete had the potential to be a player nearly equal to Steph in his scoring ability and shooting (by accounts if he had had the 3 pt line he would have been a nearly 4-6 pts per game higher scorer and would have been in the neighborhood of a 38% 3 pt shooter for his career, with basically zero focus on the long-ball...what would happen if that were his primary focus?), with better play-making and defense. There are those timeless ones, like Jordan and LeBron, but they are literally in a class by themselves. But no one can imagine how giving a player like Chamberlain the same modern advantages as the advancements that have been made in conditioning, training in general, and technique/skills training would not just simply create a beast that could not be reckoned with in any era. Since no one can conceive of this stuff, and everyone gets stuck in the rut of "but he old guy, slow and fat and short" then it is a pointless exercise outside of the top 10 players from the past 10 years. As soon as they are gone, then the voters cannot get their heads around how to incorporate players from past eras because we are so short-sighted as a species. News flash "the good old days" don't really exist, they were just different old days. And the "today's everything is better/faster/harder/more difficult/easier than anything in X era" is garbage too.

TL/DR: the voters are idiots, so the competition is a total crap shoot and no better than just having everyone guess a number between 1 and 100.

Carry on.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Translation: voters are ****ing clueless and cannot imagine well enough to extrapolate how a player like Kareem would still be dominant in today's NBA by a mile, especially with modern medicine, training, and coaching, all just because he played in the "olden days". Main reason I won't play. It is insanely stupid to say that a player like Oscar Robertson or Bill Russell or Walton or Dr. J would not be simply dominant if their career had the same trajectory, with modern coaching training and medicine, as a Durant or Irving or Giannis or basically anyone except LeBron in the modern age. Pistol Pete had the potential to be a player nearly equal to Steph in his scoring ability and shooting (by accounts if he had had the 3 pt line he would have been a nearly 4-6 pts per game higher scorer and would have been in the neighborhood of a 38% 3 pt shooter for his career, with basically zero focus on the long-ball...what would happen if that were his primary focus?), with better play-making and defense. There are those timeless ones, like Jordan and LeBron, but they are literally in a class by themselves. But no one can imagine how giving a player like Chamberlain the same modern advantages as the advancements that have been made in conditioning, training in general, and technique/skills training would not just simply create a beast that could not be reckoned with in any era. Since no one can conceive of this stuff, and everyone gets stuck in the rut of "but he old guy, slow and fat and short" then it is a pointless exercise outside of the top 10 players from the past 10 years. As soon as they are gone, then the voters cannot get their heads around how to incorporate players from past eras because we are so short-sighted as a species. News flash "the good old days" don't really exist, they were just different old days. And the "today's everything is better/faster/harder/more difficult/easier than anything in X era" is garbage too.

TL/DR: the voters are idiots, so the competition is a total crap shoot and no better than just having everyone guess a number between 1 and 100.

Carry on.
Click to expand...
Wilt Chamberlain would absolutely dominate in today's game. LeBron is one of the most physically gifted players of all time. Wilt was much more physically gifted than LeBron.

I agree that it's really hard to do this competitions without a true understanding of every single player.
 
LoPo said:
Wilt Chamberlain would absolutely dominate in today's game. LeBron is one of the most physically gifted players of all time. Wilt was much more physically gifted than LeBron.

I agree that it's really hard to do this competitions without a true understanding of every single player.
Click to expand...
At least an ability to imagine what might have been, even if just extrapolated from their stats in their era. But too often it all just gets shut down "nah, he old and sucks".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top